jinvta wrote:I agree with most of what BHH said except for the following:

“There is a poor family there who’ve got the torture of not knowing whether their daughter is alive or not.”

Not so 'poor' now after he, BHH, himself took part in a sponsored balloon launch for them, with each balloon costing £1 a time, with all 'proceeds' going to the McCanns private 'company' FindMadeleinefund!

And now he has 'oversight' of an investigation which could, ultimately, lead right to the door of the people he 'fund raised' for!

I don't think he, BHH, will allow AR, or anyone else at the MET, to find his personal 'friends' the McCanns, guilty of ANYTHING, anytime soon!

Do you?

ETA: I think the whole McCann 'faux' investigation should be passed off to 'independent' Assistant Chief Constable Steve Cotterill of Derbyshire Police.

Not only did he nail the 'murdering scum Philpotts' he hasn't, as far as i know, taken part in any 'fundraising' events FOR the McCanns personal benefit, unlike MET boss BHH!

Mr Cotterill was not having any 'truck' with the 'floods of tears' Philpotts 'play acting' (re: press conference/appeal)

I havn't read anything about Clarence's thoughts on this latest attempt to find Madeleine and Redwood will be even more ridiculed if nothing comes of it. Having said that , the Portugese have agreed to stick their necks out by signing the letter even tough only one of the three is Portugese and wherever he is he will go to ground now. Iris, do you really think it is BHH calling the tune and Redwood doing his bidding??? If nothing comes of this I can foresee Joe Public in Britain demanding the investigation be closed because it is taxpayers money paying for it .

mossman wrote:Travelling back in time to the Crimewatch drama, Redwood asked for help in finding a number of persons of interest. Two men speaking maybe Geman or Dutch, a "bogus" charity collector.

So a number of men were being sought and Redwood did say, iirc, that they may well be innocent parties and they want to identify them

The only basis for knowing three burglars are referred to in the letter is a report quoting Mitchell. So a letter has been issued but Clarence is the one telling us about burglars, not SY.

It is not impossible that SY now think they know who those other people they were trying to locate are, and it is those that the letter refers to. Dutch/German speaking men and charity collectors.

So eliminate those men mentioned in CW and things do not look good - the only one left is the efit man with blond child in arms.

Morning mossman, do we really believe this will be the breakthrough , which because of it being printed all over the World has alerted the Burglars ????

I think serious questions will have to be asked about the British Government using taxpayers money totalling P5 million up to now with absolutely no progress.

Hi panda. No, I don't necessarily believe this is a breakthrough we have waited for but I certainly believe the burglar story has been planted by Mitchell.

There are three people identified in CW as being of interest to SY (excluding Smithman). The charity collector and two blond Dutch/German men seen talking. If, and I'm only saying if, these three men have been found SY have already said they want to talk to them and they could be entirely innocent. If that turns out to be the case, the only person left to identify is Smithman. That is not a situation team McCann want to be in.

So I believe there are three people but I do not believe the burglar story.

mossman wrote:Travelling back in time to the Crimewatch drama, Redwood asked for help in finding a number of persons of interest. Two men speaking maybe Geman or Dutch, a "bogus" charity collector.

So a number of men were being sought and Redwood did say, iirc, that they may well be innocent parties and they want to identify them

The only basis for knowing three burglars are referred to in the letter is a report quoting Mitchell. So a letter has been issued but Clarence is the one telling us about burglars, not SY.

It is not impossible that SY now think they know who those other people they were trying to locate are, and it is those that the letter refers to. Dutch/German speaking men and charity collectors.

So eliminate those men mentioned in CW and things do not look good - the only one left is the efit man with blond child in arms.

Morning mossman, do we really believe this will be the breakthrough , which because of it being printed all over the World has alerted the Burglars ????

I think serious questions will have to be asked about the British Government using taxpayers money totalling P5 million up to now with absolutely no progress.

Hi panda. No, I don't necessarily believe this is a breakthrough we have waited for but I certainly believe the burglar story has been planted by Mitchell.

There are three people identified in CW as being of interest to SY (excluding Smithman). The charity collector and two blond Dutch/German men seen talking. If, and I'm only saying if, these three men have been found SY have already said they want to talk to them and they could be entirely innocent. If that turns out to be the case, the only person left to identify is Smithman. That is not a situation team McCann want to be in.

So I believe there are three people but I do not believe the burglar story.

I have never subscribed to the Smith theory , if you notice Gerry carried Saun in the upright position going up the steps on the Plane which is what alerted Mr Smith. He made a statement while he was in Portugal but it was only three or four months later when he saw the way Gerry carried Suan that reminded him His Wife declined to give an interview to the Guarda in Ireland.If it IS Mitchell giving the Press all this information , it had to come from the McCanns or Redwood who should stop telling the McCanns what is going on. The Trial is 7th Feb , so expect a couple more "persons of interest" to be reported before then. Let's hope the case is closed on the 7th and Amaral wins, all this nonsense will stop then.

Or maybe the MSM are playing a very subtle game here. They are describing the three persons of interest as "burglars". And of course the initial reaction from anyone reading this is, "burglars steal THINGS! Not children!" So why call them "burglars" if the implication is that they are also kidnappers? Why not use the term "intruders" or "home invaders"?